Should Segways and e-scooters be allowed on the carriage roads of Acadia National Park?/Rebecca Latson file

An effort by the National Park Service to let park superintendents decide whether hoverboards, e-scooters, and Segways can be used in their parks is too open-ended to protect park resources, according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.

The Park Service long has viewed Segways as suitable for moving about national parks. Back in 2007 Segway tours were allowed at Antietam National Battlefield in Maryland for disabled visitors.

The proposed rule, which is open for public comments through March 17, "would clarify that superintendents have the authority to manage the use of powered micromobility devices in park areas where they are appropriate, including on sidewalks and gravel/paved paths."

Currently, the Park Service classifies micromobility devices "in the same category as cars, meaning that powered micromobility devices are subject to rules about where they may be operated that were intended for heavier and larger conventional motor vehicles."

Last September, rangers in Glacier National Park reportedly cited a visitor for riding a hoverboard on Swiftcurrent Lake, which is off-limits for motorized craft. They also warned him for failing to obtain an aquatic invasive species inspection. 

In comments filed on the proposed rule, PEER said the approach is subject to few parameters, allowing for inconsistent treatment of these devices from park to park and within a park with each change of superintendent.

“The National Park System is supposed to be operated as one system, united by a single purpose,” said PEER board member Frank Buono, a retired 25-year National Park SErvice manager. “This proposed rule gives too much latitude to individual park superintendents and affords insufficient protection for park resources.”

From PEER's view, the proposed rule contains only one major restriction — that these motorized devices may not be used in designated wilderness. Yet, the Wilderness Act already forbids motorized transportation, generally, thus the rule provides no additional protection. At the same time, the proposal does not mention:

• Recommended Wilderness. Congress has yet to ratify the presidential recommendation to designate wilderness over 5 million acres in 17 national parks ranging from Glacier in Montana to Big Bend in Texas;
• Proposed Wilderness. NPS has also proposed wilderness in six national park units: Bighorn Canyon, Cape Lookout, Glen Canyon, Grand Canyon, Lake Mead (the Arizona portions) and Voyageurs;
• Eligible Wilderness. These are lands the NPS has formally determined are “eligible” for wilderness designation. NPS policy says these lands should be managed to protect their wilderness character, but the proposed rule could create needless conflict; and
• Sensitive Areas. Many park units have areas of wildlife critical habitat, natural quiet, battlefields, cultural landscapes, and historic properties – listed or eligible for listing – that may be adversely affected by motorized traffic.

PEER is recommending that all these areas be made explicitly off-limits to hoverboards and other such devices both to be consistent with other NPS policies and to protect superintendents from being pressured to make exceptions that will be hard to undo later or limit.

In recent years, PEER successfully litigated against an NPS decision to open all parks to e-bikes without requiring environmental assessment as to potential impacts.

“We are not sure what the motivation for this policy is or why this would be a priority now,” said PEER Executive Director Tim Whitehouse, noting that the proposal emerged in the last weeks of the Biden administration. “We urge the Park Service to be more mindful of the potential impacts of national policies authorizing mechanized visitation."